Iím currently a Pentax user and Iím contemplating switching brands. I know enough about Nikon to give me an idea of what Iím looking for, but not enough regarding the specifics to each body.
Iíve been shooting Pentax for about 5 years. Although I like the company, what I dislike is the AF system and the metering that accompanies it. Iím also looking for a full frame body.
My budget is roughly $3000. That would mean Iím selling my Pentax gear to make this happen.
1. I want a FF camera. I like the perspective and I since I do a lot of portrait work, I really want the ability to blow out the backgrounds. Sure I can do this on my K-5, but from what I readÖ..its much easier to do with the FF sensor.
2. Iíd like at least 6fps in burst mode. Iím giving some serious thought to the d800 but I realize that the fps rate is slow.
3. Auto focus is on of my priorities along with consistent metering.
4. ISO capability has to be better than my K5. This is the one area that my Pentax excels at.
Iím not against buying used to make this happen. What Iím not familiar with are the different d3 bodies and which one fits my needs.
My neighbor shoots Canon and will sell me a mint 5dii for about 1000. Itís a great deal BUTÖ..the ISO capabilities are not as good as my K5 and the AF system of the 5dii (from what Iíve read) is just as bad as my Pentax gear.
Any information or direction is appreciated. Iím not a beginner so I wanted to put this in a thread where there will be specifics involved.
Best,
Kevin

If you go by the review on this site:
http://snapsort.com/...0-vs-Pentax_K-5
The D800 is the only way to go. I own one, it is an unbelievable camera. I came from the Pentax world, but a long time ago, Nikon has out shined Pentax for as long as I can remember. I don't think you will go wrong switching to Nikon. The Canon, Dii, as good a deal as it is, would be a mistake in my opinion. I have heard a number of retailers telling me Canon owners are switching to Nikon because of the D800.
I love mine, I would not change it for anything. The only foible it has is the frame rate, but I can live with it. Image quality is second to non! And that is the bottom line.

Is there a difference between the d800 and the d800e or are we speaking about the same camera?
And the obvious question.....why the d800 over the 5diii? As an active member of the Pentax forums.....I can assure you I'm not trying to start a fight with that question.

What lenses do you currently run?
No point in looking at a D800 (regardless of how suitable it may or may not be for you) as its going to blow your entire budget. It's glass that matters and it's glass that costs all the money in a reasonably sized kit.
Work out what Nikon lenses you are going to need to cover your current shooting and then see what you have left. To get the best from a pro body you're going to want pro lenses so that's a 14-24mm & 24-70mm & 70-200mm - all f2.8 max apertures - all well over $1k - and that's just a start, now add a decent portrait prime, let's say a 85mm f1.4 at another $1k+............and we haven't even started on a flash, a remote release, filters and probably new cards.

I think that whether you get a 5D Mk3 or a D800/D4 or a D3S/D700 for that matter you are going to be a very happy man. It seems that decent Canon glass is a bit cheaper than Nikon but it depends what you want. Nikons wide angle glass is the best, Canons fast zooms are the best. It is a minefield where there is no correct answer. From what I can gather if AF is a hugely important factor then it seems Canon are ahead on that front. I am also not sure where you heard that the 5D Mk2 has bad ISO performance, I am under the impression that its high ISO performance is very good indeed.
I can tell you that I absolutely adore my consumer grade Nikon and will not be switching brands anytime soon.

Interests:Photography, Photography, , More Photography, More Photography and now the Philadelphia Eagles.

Posted 10 September 2012 - 01:06 PM

Hmm, expert answers from the PlanetNikon orbit but I will add if you can, rent one for a week or weekend, try it. This way you can get test the capabilities and physical characteristics ..AD, speed, weight, your hand grip etc.
Welcome to our Planet.

I agree, lenses. Won't matter much which body you get if you don't have lenses for it. A few questions;
You say AF and metering is what you dislike about your current system, what in particular don't you like, what is the problem your having? What is your requirement for AF and the meter?
"Blowing out the backgrounds", are you referring to bokeh? Because this is a function of the lens, and not whether it is a full frame or not?
Your doing portraits; what is your requirement for frame rate? Because, a used D700 could fill the bill with your budget, you can get a body and a lens.
Can you explain the ISO? I mean, we are a Nikon site, I wouldn't have a clue what the ISO performance is on a Pentax. What do you need in the way of ISO?
You can always ask you neighbor to shot a few with his Cannon and see if it works for you. Nothing like having a body in hand and testing to see if it does what you need. Not that I saying to go buy a cannon, it just seems like you have the opportunity to check out the ISO performance by shooting a few.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

From what I can gather if AF is a hugely important factor then it seems Canon are ahead on that front

Errr....no they're not. The 5D MkII uses a variation of the old 20D/30D AF chip which is years out of date. The newer MkIII uses a 7D based AF which is very good but even that is generally regarded as being a little behind the 51 Point AF chips in Nikon Pro bodies.
If we're talking 1Dx then it is meant to be the current king of AF beating even the D4 for accuracy but remember the D800 also has the D4 AF chip so that will out perform a 5D MkIII bracket camera.

Errr....no they're not. The 5D MkII uses a variation of the old 20D/30D AF chip which is years out of date. The newer MkIII uses a 7D based AF which is very good but even that is generally regarded as being a little behind the 51 Point AF chips in Nikon Pro bodies.
If we're talking 1Dx then it is meant to be the current king of AF beating even the D4 for accuracy but remember the D800 also has the D4 AF chip so that will out perform a 5D MkIII bracket camera.

I stand corrected mate. Surprising that you still see so many white lenses at sporting events then really. You would have thought all those pro's wouldnt be able to afford to miss the shot.

Here's a list of my workhorses on my Pentax system. I have others...but these are my go to lenses
FA 43 ltd 1.9
FA 31 ltd 1.8
DA 50mm 1.4
28-77mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
10-20mm 3.5...only really used for my BG composites. But its used a lot.
My 70-200 is my fav and would be a purchase...although I realize an expensive one.
Since you're not familiar the fa ltd's are some of the best primes around. Problem is they are suited for FF. The perspective is much better.
ISO:
I can shoot cleanly at 6400 with very little post processing on my K5. I can use the pics at 10,000 if I run a plug in and I've saved pics at 12,800. When I say "use" I mean I'd sell them to a paying customer. I want something that I won't have to worry when I need to go into the 6400 range. Of course the expanded range is 52,000 but those are not even worth taking. You know how that goes.
I have a ton of lighting stuff but I'll be able to use my mono's and manual speed-lights with the Nikon system. Eventually I realize I'd need something with ttl capabilities. I have 3 speed-lights for my Pentax gear with p-ttl ability and a bunch of manual stuff. I'll probably get an sb-800....or two.
My wish list.....
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
50 1.4
I get very inconsistent results with my system. Some shots are dead on...others if I'm spot metering or AF select...I miss the mark by a mile. I'm sick of being told "focus and recompose because the AF center point is the most accurate". I want a system where I know if I'm selecting the focus point...it will hit the mark. My k-5 only has an 11 point AF system. These inconsistencies are also present with metering...esp spot metering. I know Nikon is the choice for focus speed and ability.....which is why I'm here. I'm not against the D700 but I know nothing about it.
If I did the switch...I'd hope to grab a 24-70 with the body and do a few senior sessions with it to pay for the 70-200. From there I could float a fast 50 on my dime.
Please keep this thread going...as I need some advice.

One more thing...why is the d800 not considered part of the "professional body" forum?

It is part of the semi-pro forum here on the planet. Nikon does not specify it as a pro body. Nikon literature has the words "pro" all over it, but it is not classified as pro body (I don't know why). Currently, Nikon NPS recognizes the D4, D3x, D3s, D3 & D2x as pro bodies (I called them last week). Also, NPS might be different in Europe, just to make sure one is throughly confused by designations.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

One thing you might need to consider when getting lenses. If I read the comparison Art put up, the K5 has a sensor shift for image stabilization, while for Nikon, that is in the lens. If you depend on that feature, you will need to be sure you get VR (vibration reduction) lenses.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

Honest opinion - stick with Pentax.
You're going to struggle to get anywhere even close to those FA lenses with Nikon unless you go f1.4 and they cost a small (in some cases huge) fortune.
You're right that Pentax have focusing issues and their exposure system is less than consistent but the K5 is a blindingly good camera and you are not going to get close to the kit you have in a million years - a Lotto win might do it mind you - so I really would stick to what you have.
Possibly not what you want to hear but after 24 years of selling cameras I know when to tell someone not to jump ship.

Well, Robin is right! My 105mm on the D800 body is like listening to Johann Strauss II - The Blue Danube Waltz, on three quarter volume driving at 100 mph in your rag top Porsche and not have to worry about getting a speeding ticket!

"Photography is man's attempt at immortality. To save our memories and share them. The places we have been, the people we have known, the things we have done. To share with others for eternity, or until the images fade away."

Clean 6400 FX @ $3k; D700 (you will have to go used be hard to find new), D800. D800e is the same 800 with Anti-Aliasing Filter Removed but more than 3k. Nikon is coming out with new stuff, announcements are forth coming this week, so the rumors go. But, you still have to factor a lens, so, your a bit short at the moment.

Edited by Dennis, 10 September 2012 - 05:32 PM.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

Here's where I'm currently at....I'm not a full time pro. I shoot about 35 jobs a year. Mostly newborn and seniors. I have a full time job as a computer teacher. However, I have enough things to worry about when I'm shooting that I want to eliminate the equipment from the equation. If I'm losing what few jobs I have because of focus/quality and not my technique....perhaps I should consider an upgrade. To me this feels like I've "outgrown my camera"

I'm not loaded, but what is $3000 bucks for a hobby that you love and a side business over the course of a few years? Especially if it means better quality....or in this case top of the line quality.

I'd be dumping everything from Pentax so that should put me at close to $4000.

For studio work the K5 is ok. More than adequate. But I feel like I'm missing something....consistency.

If you can find one, yes. Here is a site that compared a lot of top bodies ISO; http://www.kenrockwe...h-ISO/index.htm
Now, do you depend on image stabilization? If so, VR lenses are in order. The 24-70/2.8 does not have VR. Might not matter that it does not have VR if you shoot portraits with a tripod. I assume you need high ISO because your not always in controlled studio light and such?
You can get a D800 for that price, but that is body only. 24-70/2.8, around $1900. It will be hard to advise. Keep in mind, the D800 has big files, which means you need a computer and storage system to handle these files, so that is going to be part of the cost. Can you limp a long, I think Art can answer that one better than I can.
I'm not trying to discourage you, but, there are a lot of options for studio when we talk low ISO. For example, 85mm/1.4, fantastic portrait lens, and is the one that qualifies for the creamy bokeh requirement you listed, but it costs around $1700. But, you can also get the same results (95%) with a 85mm/1.8 @ $500. So, we're talking about technique, can you also get great bokeh with 24-70? Yes.
I guess, you have to sell everything you got to upgrade? Which means, you need at least one lens. The 70-200/2.8 VR II is $2400, you can go with a 80-200/2.8 $1300, no VR. Those are new, don't know how much in the used market, or if you consider used. Both are great lenses, just the latter is older lens.
Do you want a current body, or can go used? Because, I think that, on a tight budget, you would need to go used. D3, I don't know the used cost, but I know on your budget, you can get a used D700 and a lens, or two. You just give up film rate, you can get a grip and you can increases the rate by one. Now, your the only one that can answer that. We can certainly spend your money for you
PS: After thinking a bit, I have to side with Robin; jumping ship for a "hobby" as you put it, I don't know pentax, but you can't get what you need by getting another pentax? Don't get me wrong, I love Nikon, had Nikon for more than 30 years. But, your starting all over with a system you don't know. We all know, it is not the camera, it is the photographer. The body gives tools, and if Nikon is is, so be it. But, it is a large jump, even if you went Cannon (but Nikon is better ). The investment is the lenses, that is what makes any body look good, besides the photographer knowledge. Just had to throw that out... now, when are you going to get a Nikon D800? Might wnat to drop a line here, I here they have good deals on used equipment... just say Darell sent ya; http://www.planetnik...p?showforum=115

Edited by Dennis, 10 September 2012 - 09:36 PM.

Thanks, Dennis.

Photography: 100 percent art, 100 percent technical. It takes a photographer to blend them into an image.

That is an excellent image D. Amazing colour and composition, I like it.
As Dennis said, you have to consider storage. I am at my wits end already with the space my images are chewing through on my hard drives! I am going to fill a TB in no time! To give you an idea of what the D800 can do, see this image I posted, it is about the best exposure image I have taken. I don't do people images, mostly nature and macro.
Check out some of the images here:
http://www.planetnik...opic=18166&st=0
and this one in particular will give you a great idea of what you can expect from a D800:
Falcon-example.jpg158.89KB0 downloads
Taken with my 105mm.

Interests:I am an avid film user and digital user. I enjoy both formats and firmly believe they can live side by side.

Right Jazz! :D

Posted 11 September 2012 - 01:41 AM

With your budget here is my 2 cents.
D700 FX a very tried and true DSLR and in the used market you can get mint copies for under $2000. The D700 is also very fast to AF and write, plus its faster in FPS than the D800 and the battery grip on the D700 is very reasonable if you like a grip. Plus there are rumors a lower price FX model called the D600, people seem to think the price will run between $1500 to $2000 but nobody really knows and its specs are also a guess so nobody but Nikon knows for sure.
As far as your choice of lens there are a few that stand out that can be had for around $1000, the Nikkor 24-120 f4G AF-s VR used or refurb new is higher around $1200, the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM EX this is a very good lens I use it on my D700 for weddings and events all the time it runs just under $1000 new, it is sharp and accurate with excellent color. Another lens to consider is the older Nikkor 28-70 f2.8D AF-S ED this lens is fast and a beast and was Nikon's flagship until the newer 24-70 f2.8 came out, used they seem to hover right around $1000.
But I tend to agree with Black Pearl you have a ton of great glass I would stay with Pentax unless the AF system is so bad you are losing money and clients.
Jim

One of the other plusses about Pentax is the fact that the the body has image stabilization, so you're not paying for it in every lens. But....I think they proved that lens stabilization is better than the body approach. To anwer the question....yes VR would be a must.
Can someone chime in with the differences between the D3's? D3,D3s,D3x?I
I appreciate all the suggestions. I've spent the last 5 years on the other end of this over on the Pentax Forums. I'm really not familiar with the specifics of the Canikon families. WTBS, I don't have an allegiance to either one. Makes me wonder if I should consider my neighbors 5dii to get me started in the FF world.
When looking at glass, what constitutes the full frame specific category for Nikon, is it listed as "FX"? THat's what I don't know much about.